Cross Cultural

Cross Cultural Law

According to the contract between Song Ling and Bambang , it was Bambang who as supposed to meet the freight and insurance charges of the shipment

According to the contract between Song Ling and Bambang , it was Bambang who was supposed to meet the freight and insurance charges of the shipment . Under the law of contract a party can accept a contract by conduct . He needs not to necessarily give his express acceptance . An offer can be accepted either orally , in writing or by conduct- Even though Bambang did

not expressly indicate his confirmation to the clause requiring that the buyer meets the freight and insurance charges his letter proposing on the carrier to be used subsequently amounted to acceptance of the terms of contract . These facts are supported in the case of Brodgen vs . Metropolitan Railway where the plaintiff and defendants had been trading for a long period of time . At one point , the defendants placed an to the plaintiff but with different terms i .e . lesser price than usual . As usual , the plaintiffs accepted the and supplied the goods . Later on , Brodgen (plaintiffs ) sued on the different terms . It was held that there was acceptance by conduct by the plaintiffs supplying the goods as usual given the period of business relationship

However , there exists no contract between SEATS and Bambang over anything to do with the shipment of the wine . Song ling is therefore under an obligation to sue Bambang , recover the freight and storage charges and remit the same to SEATS . She cannot expect SEATS to obtain this money from Bambang directly because under the Victorian laws , a contract creates rights and obligation only between the parties related to that contract . A contract does not transfer rights and obligations to a stranger in the contract as it was held in the case of Dunlop PreumaticTyre Co . vs . Selfridge . In this case the plaintiff agreed with X not to sell tyres below Dunlop 's price list . X were dealers in the tyres manufactured by the plaintiff . Further , he made another agreement that as Dunlop 's agent , they were to secure similar contracts with any other party who dealt with Dunlop 's tyres . X entered into such an agreement with Selfridge . But Selfridge breached this agreement later forcing Dunlop to sue him for breach of contract held . The suit was to fail as Dunlop was a stranger to the contract between X and Selfridge Similarly , the agreement in this case regarding the freight charges was between SEATS and Sing Long , Bambang being a stranger to the agreement

Another action available to Song Ling is that of bringing an action of negligence against SEATS to counter their suit of recovering the freight charges from them . This is due to the damage that was caused to 15 ,000 cartons when being transhipped in Port Moresby to MV Papal . The damage arose as result of a fault of the slevedores PNG muscle , subcontractors for SEAT . SEAT owed Song...